Driver pleads guilty to killing Chris Boardman's mum

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988, please?

On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 7:30:32 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988, please?

Why?

On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 6:34:27 PM UTC, Simon Jester wrote:

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.

I reckon he will get a year's suspended sentence and a 5 year ban. Too many judges are sympathetic to killer drivers, even if they are caught deleting phone messages.

Pity the perverting justice bit was binned as the courts hate that - see Regina vs Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce.

On 17/12/2018 19:30, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in
order, maybe 5 years. I am more interested in the length of the
driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate. Added to that he
should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor
vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988,
please?

It's similar to the law that says you must be given all the Christmas
presents you ask for. (Queue Nugentbot with comprehension failure.)

On 17/12/2018 19:58, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 7:30:32 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988, please?

Why?

In order to establish (or not) whether a court anywhere in the United
Kingdom has the power to:

(a) hand down a twenty-five year driving disqualification, or

(b) ban a citizen from being conveyed in or on a motor vehicle (for
example, a bus or a taxi or an ambulance).

Of course, it could just have been an intemperate rant on your part. I'm
not sure which I'd rather put money on.

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 12:39:10 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 19:58, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 7:30:32 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988, please?

Why?

In order to establish (or not) whether a court anywhere in the United
Kingdom has the power to:

(a) hand down a twenty-five year driving disqualification, or

(b) ban a citizen from being conveyed in or on a motor vehicle (for
example, a bus or a taxi or an ambulance).

Of course, it could just have been an intemperate rant on your part. I'm
not sure which I'd rather put money on.

No, I mean why should I do anything you say?
When you are asked for evidence you throw a tantrum and run away with the goalposts.

On 18/12/2018 15:38, Simon Jester wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 12:39:10 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 19:58, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 7:30:32 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988, please?

Why?

In order to establish (or not) whether a court anywhere in the United
Kingdom has the power to:

(a) hand down a twenty-five year driving disqualification, or

(b) ban a citizen from being conveyed in or on a motor vehicle (for
example, a bus or a taxi or an ambulance).

Of course, it could just have been an intemperate rant on your part. I'm
not sure which I'd rather put money on.

No, I mean why should I do anything you say?

There is no reason at all why you should feel obliged to comply with my
pefectly reasonable and polite request.

Especially so since you know that there are no legal provisions for what
you suggested. As a matter of fact, I knew you wpouldn't.

When you are asked for evidence you throw a tantrum and run away with the goalposts.

I don't recognise that childish rant as being rooted in reality. But
anyone reading this thread knew that you would not be able to cite the
legal provisions I asked for, for the simple reason that they don't exist.

Feel free to be as rude and irelevant as you like in response.

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 4:04:18 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 18/12/2018 15:38, Simon Jester wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 12:39:10 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 19:58, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 7:30:32 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 17/12/2018 18:34, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, wrote:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-mother.html

QUOTE:
"Mr Curtis said that, in the minutes before the crash, at the junction of Mold Road and Ffordd Llanarth, Rosney took three separate phone calls while driving his Mitsubishi pick-up truck, which did not have a hands-free facility.

He said: 'The phone was being used on speaker mode, not requiring the defendant to handle the phone as he was talking, but plainly to accept or reject or end calls.

'The call ended prior to entry on to the roundabout, we know that from billing data.

'What we will say the case is, then, is that the defendant continued to be distracted by a) the telephone calls which he had been taking, and b) his mobile telephone, which was on the passenger seat inside his vehicle.

'We know he did not see Mrs Boardman and first realised he may have collided with her when his vehicle was physically riding over Mrs Boardman's body.'

He said a witness, Kayleigh Anders, saw the defendant looking down towards his lap and talking, which gave the impression he was still talking on the phone.

Rosney and his wife had both been charged with perverting the course of justice after it was alleged that they ***deleted*** (EMPHASIS MINE) call logs from their phones, but the charges were dropped following prosecution evidence in the first trial in July.

Judge Rhys Rowlands said the guilty plea would attract some credit when Rosney was being sentenced but 'nowhere near as much' as it would have if it had been made when he was on trial earlier this year.

He adjourned sentencing until January 31 and told Rosney that all sentencing options, including ***custody*** (EMPHASIS MINE), would be open to him.

ENDS.

Looks like he was wriggling like a worm until he realised his phone calls were on a log. Scum of the earth.

A custodial sentence as a deterrent to others is certainly in order, maybe 5 years.
I am more interested in the length of the driving ban, 25 years would seem appropriate.
Added to that he should not be allowed to travel in any form of private motor vehicle for 10 years.

Would you quote the relevant Section of the Road Traffic Act 1988, please?

Why?

In order to establish (or not) whether a court anywhere in the United
Kingdom has the power to:

(a) hand down a twenty-five year driving disqualification, or

(b) ban a citizen from being conveyed in or on a motor vehicle (for
example, a bus or a taxi or an ambulance).

Of course, it could just have been an intemperate rant on your part. I'm
not sure which I'd rather put money on.

No, I mean why should I do anything you say?

There is no reason at all why you should feel obliged to comply with my
pefectly reasonable and polite request.

How gracious of you.

Especially so since you know that there are no legal provisions for what
you suggested. As a matter of fact, I knew you wpouldn't.

Dennis Putz


When you are asked for evidence you throw a tantrum and run away with the goalposts.

I don't recognise that childish rant as being rooted in reality.

ECT can have that effect.